[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Very fun piece about the wagering sites accuracy predicting elections including a fascinating history of bookmaking presidential contests from the 1800's through the first part of the 20th century. Great read..

And though not a part of the column, Jimmy the Greek famously built his name and a large bankroll betting Truman over Dewey in 1948.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-..._b_140181.html

Recently I was in Kentucky, reporting on horseracing for Garden & Gun. A "whale" (bettor of thousands of dollars per day) I interviewed, Mike Maloney, successfully traded securities, options and futures, but chose to go to the track every day instead because it offered him a greater challenge. "There are many, many, many more factors to consider in betting horseraces," he said.

I asked him: "Do you think handicappers can forecast the outcome of the presidential election better than polls?"

He didn't hesitate. "Polls can be inaccurate. People may say what is politically correct, the questions may be leading, the pollsters may be biased. A pollster can still bill for an inaccurate poll. Bookmakers must make an accurate line or they lose -- period."

As I mentioned in another thread, I was pretty certain the election was over on Monday night when I saw I could get 4.5-1 on McCain winning Ohio and 2.5-1 on McCain winning Florida.

Re Jimmy the Greek...FWIW, his blackjack advice was among the worst in print.

--Dunbar